From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755527Ab1HWVLI (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:11:08 -0400
Received: from s15228384.onlinehome-server.info ([87.106.30.177]:41555 "EHLO
	mail.x86-64.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751534Ab1HWVLA (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:11:00 -0400
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 23:10:47 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@mit.edu>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" 
	<user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re:
 [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)
Message-ID: <20110823211047.GC15295@aftab>
References: <20110823010146.GY2203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20110823011312.GZ2203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20110823021717.GA2203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20110823061531.GC2203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFzUAuPEwcvVvuXooWMT6XpDuOjEHi-Ab+SOhZVjfbVYpA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAObL_7F-E2y_cd1MK4ayBx_CqszrewSrBt6V7=ndVuBQrrmTKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110823162251.GC13138@aftab>
 <4E53FC6E.1030807@zytor.com>
 <20110823205616.GA15295@aftab>
 <4E54163B.6080205@zytor.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4E54163B.6080205@zytor.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 05:06:03PM -0400, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 08/23/2011 01:56 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > 
> > But no, I don't think the difference has disappeared - to the contrary,
> > AFAICT, the intention is for SYSCALL to be the fastest way to do
> > syscalls on x86 due to diminished number of segment checks etc. INT80
> > is legacy, slower, etc. I believe Andy measured a similar situation on
> > Sandy Bridge with SYSCALL having latencies in the tens of nsecs range
> > and INT80 being much slower. Ingo also measured a similar situation
> > where the latency gap between the two on Intel is even bigger.
> > 
> 
> Sandy Bridge doesn't have SYSCALL32 at all.  It has SYSENTER and SYSCALL64.

Yeah, I was talking about SYSCALL in general.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551